The 2021 City Council election political season is already upon us. Exhibit one: a Fake News Map (the one on the left) posted by a member of the ABC Political PAC. As the map on the right shows: there are PLENTY of apartments throughout Cambridge, alas far too many now vacant due to COVID, and many are likely to remain so since more and more people will be working from home even after COVID loses momentum.

The aim of this fake news  map put out by the developer-liked ABC Political PAC appears to be to encourage its followers to press City Council for the up-zoning of all of Cambridge so that developers can do whatever they want (where ever). At the same time ABC is attacking our Conservation and Historic Districts as well as voluntary neighborhood groups and their long-standing advocacy roles on local building developments.

UPDATE: Contrary to what ABC spokesmen may tell one,  CCC does NOT opposed to the large number of  apartment buildings and multi-home and single home apartments already in our neighborhoods (or our MANY friends who are renting throughout our city).  Indeed we welcome them into the eclectic mix of neighborhood architecture and residents throughout the city.
​

Map Below: Targeted sites in each zip code for 40 unit, 4 story tall AHO projects comprise very property over 10,000 SF. Properties between 5,000 SF and 9.99 K SF could be combined or used as is for 4 story projects with fewer units. FAR of 2.0 Impacts: Using Cambridge examples from the 02138zip code, the largest of Cambridge’s five zip codes with 3318 structures, reveals how changes to FAR limits can impact neighborhood density dramatically.

Note that the planned Paris apartment community at the lower left has an FAR of 1.5 which is considered maximum for this kind of dwelling in most settings. AnFAR of  2.0 worldwide is intended for FAR MORE dense urban areas or structures – student dorms, large and tall apartment complexes, and office buildings. Key parts of residential Cambridge do not meet the criteria for 2.0 FAR found in other places like New York city, Mumbai, or outlying areas of Paris.

Let's look now at the FAR context of specific Cambridge neighborhoods in 02138 where these large AHO Developments are targeted to be built. As we can see below some of these large projects would dramatically impact a local neighborhood.

Group 1 (above): 0.20 to 0.49 FAR (410 structures) = 12% of buildings in 02138. These are primarily small 1 and 2 story structures on streets where the proposed 2.0 FAR for affordable housing up-zoning can be 4 to 10 times larger than the massing of current structures, with up to 40 new units replacing existing smaller homes.
 

Group 2 (above): 0.49 to .99 FAR (1421 structures) = 43% of buildings in 02138. Mostly 1, 2, and some 3 story, single & two-family residences where a 2.0 FAR will mean 4 story structures (often double the height) and 2 to 4 times the massing of current structures.
 
Increasing FAR allowances for Groups 1 & 2 to 2.00 FAR, allowing 4-story heights, and permitting 40-unit capacities would be a massive increase in density and height for most residential streets in 02138, radically transforming these areas, whether it be for market rate or affordable housing.

Group 5 (above): 2.00- 2.99 FAR (circa. 122 structures) = 4% of buildings in 02138. Selected above are 4 story affordable housing developments similar to those being proposed city wide. Most FAR 2.0 buildings in 02138 are 3-5 story, 9+ unit apartment buildings in very dense settings, largely reserved for commercial or institutional uses.  
​
Disparities between the locations of current AHO developments and available properties elsewhere. Many targeted sites are located in the city's most expensive properties in part because these were the least urbanized parts of the city . These larger properties also have the largest proportion of large trees. Some are historically protected. So units placed in these areas not only become very expensive to build - increasing the costs of each unit dramatically and making fewer available, but also in some cases more impactful on the environment.

The larger properties appropriate to the large 40 unit AHO developments disproportionately fall in one city zip code: 02138. Since the AHO petition is "as of right" removing any oversight from citizen groups such as the Planning Board and removes any ability of citizen appeal this makes one of the largest areas of the city feel the impacts of this decision disproportionately to other zip codes.

The graphs below show properties 10,000 SF and larger and their locations in zip codes around the city. By far the largest number of these Affordable Housing projects (roughly 87%) in Cambridge are being targeted for  properties in the 02138. zipcode.

While the potential AHO locations based on size are somewhat  more widely distributed for 5,000 SF Cambridge properties and larger, still 02138 remains the disproportionate target.

What can be done now to add more Affordable Housing more equitably and in ways that will bring MORE of these units to the city and will have impacts more evenly distributed. There are many possibilities including focusing these large scale developments on the major corridors as Urban Planning guidelines have long proposed and through strategic zoning and other changes enabling neighborhoods in 02138 (and elsewhere) to introduce more affordable housing within the framework of the current housing infrastructure. 

Conclusions: Sensible limits on both FAR and height in neighborhoods with predominantly 1 and 2 story homes can help moderate  impacts of the AHO, while still allowing room for new growth and development. Along with key zoning changes in the Donovan Petition we will be able  to add far more to our affordable housing in this city and at less steep financial, environmental, and other costs.
 

CCC member, Francis Donovan, filed a zoning petition to bring more affordable housing to Cambridge. The text of this petition can be found below.

One of the aims of  this petition is to end the exclusionary Res A-1 and A-2 zoning restrictions that allow only  single family residences in these districts, while also insisting that certain conditions be met that support specifically affordable housing. We also are proposing that the lot size needed for additions be smaller. Together, these  changes will enable more housing in this part of Cambridge, and especially more affordable housing, once you add the petitioners’ request to have the city provide funds for those who meet affordability criteria to help with related renovations.  
The Donovan zoning petition also includes two addenda (see below):
APPENDEX A:  Amend AHO Currently in City Hearings to Provide Greater Equity and Sustainability

APPENDIX B: Adopt Additional Recommendations to Further Increase Affordable Housing
 
The Donovan zoning petition is not intended as a replacement for the AHO. Far from it, we see this zoning petition as an enhancement/ extension of the AHO petition, and one that also addresses an array of other ideas that can impact in a positive way on our affordable housing. We see this petition as addressing, in addition,  some of the contradictions in the Envision plan in so far as it adds environmental, urban planning, and preservation concerns that are key goals of the Envision Plan – issues that were left out of the AHO in the rush to get the latter passed. 
 
While we support the AHO we feel that key amendments are important, including those already agreed to by our City Councillors when the AHO was last voted by them (in September 2019). This petition has been months in the works (back to January or earlier, but we were also impacted by COV, with added workloads, difficulties in meeting, collecting signatures etc. In the end we pushed hard to get it ready for this key summer meeting because we wanted these broader ideas for more affordable housing be heard as this issue was in the forefront.
 
The petition signers represent BOTH owners and renters, as well as various city neighborhoods (North Cambridge, East Cambridge,  Cambridgeport, Mid-Cambridge, West Cambridge), ages, professions and ethnicities (five of us are African American/Latin American). We all believe in affordable housing and in helping our city in this and other ways. Many of us contributed in one way or another to the submitted petition and its various points – adding ideas, editing, rewriting, re-editing, adding more ideas, consulting with others (pro and con) and adding more points, reediting, rewriting etc. It is called the Donovan petition because Francis (Fritz) Donavan agreed to take on the role of first signer and was the last to edit, rewrite the petition. All along the way, we emailed drafts of our changes to the various signers for their approval.


Citizens Petition to Create More Cambridge Affordable Housing
 
WHEREAS: Cambridge needs to build more equity into its housing policy because: present rent levels are too high for many Cambridge residents,
most new rental housing in all zones is now too expensive to be affordable,
there are relatively few home owners,
and high land costs and some zoning ordinances make it economically unfeasible to create new rental units,
particularly in our more expensive neighborhoods, and
 
WHEREAS:  Cambridge is a unique historic city, founded in 1630,
and decades of growth and more recent explosive commercial development in East Cambridge have made Cambridge one of the densest cities per square mile in the U.S., Cambridge’s diverse neighborhoods include a broad array of architecturally beautiful and historic housing which most residents feel is essential to preserve, Cambridge’s current population of 110,000 is projected to increase nearly 10% to 120,000 by 2030, further increasing the demand for housing,Climate Change makes it imperative to preserve mature trees, green spaces, and open spaces between buildings, and

WHEREAS: Cambridge is a wealthy city with a progressive citizenry committed to helping its needy residents,
but the cost of a creating each new unit of tax-funded affordable housing is now extremely high, the proposed Affordable Housing Overlay (hereinafter “AHO”) currently in Ordinance Committee and/or Planning Board hearings subsidizes low income housing with minimal expenditure of public funds, only a small amount of affordable housing can be built in the manner currently proposed under the AHO,
Cambridge is one of the only cities in Massachusetts currently meeting state standards for affordable housing,
but the waiting list for affordable housing is extremely long,
and anyone in the U.S. is eligible to apply so very few individuals will get to live in the proposed new affordable units and the vast majority of Cambridge residents in need of lower-rent housing will not be helped, and
 
WHEREAS: Cambridge land is scarce and new construction is very costly,
so it is essential to make the wisest use of Cambridge’s existing housing supply
by encouraging a substantial supply of new smaller units within our existing housing infrastructure in compliance with all applicable zoning and building codes, and
 
WHEREAS: Many single-family and multi-family homes can be adapted to create a new supply of “micro-units”
such as studios, one-bedrooms, and smaller two-bedroom units, as well as single-room-occupancy communities with shared living spaces, all of which would have lower rents because of their smaller size, and such a substantial increase of new smaller units,
would enable one- and two-person households seeking lower rents to move into them, thereby bringing their former larger households into the housing market and increasing the supply of all unit sizes and thereby helping reduce average rents citywide.
 
THEREFORE: We, the undersigned ten or more Cambridge residents and registered voters, hereby petition the City Council to integrate all zoning amendments specified of this petition as new zoning law
and implementing its other recommendations as Policy Orders to the City Manager in order to:
 
 ENACT SPECIFIC NEW ZONING AMENDMENTS TO INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
APPENDIX A: Amend AHO Currently in City Hearings to Provide Greater Equity and Sustainability
APPENDIX B: Adopt Additional Recommendations to Further Increase Affordable Housing
                                                 
 
 
SPECIFIC NEW ZONING AMENDMENTS TO INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING  
Modify Cambridge Zoning Ordinance Sections 4.31 and 5.31 as follows and incorporate all feasible recommendations of Appendix A and B:
 
4.31a Current language: Detached dwelling occupied by not more than one family; Res A-1&2 YES.
 Insert new footnote as follows:
 
New Footnote. Provided that in Residence A districts the street-facing exterior design of the structure is not changed, minimal changes are made on the sides, and a maximum of 3 families inhabit the property.

Require that all alterations to create these units be made within the existing building envelope, without altering the exterior appearance, except for essential minor alterations at the building rear and the rear half of the building sides. These alterations include, specifically, new entries/means of egress, window wells, dormers, and similar essential but relatively minor changes. Special permitting will be allowed for other exterior changes. Short-term rentals shall be governed by applicable city ordinances. Provide city funding for renovations in which at least 50% of the occupants of such new units earn no more than 150% of AMI with annual recertification and commensurate deed restriction.  
Rationale:  Increase available housing in the city while preserving building facades and neighborhood character.
 
4.31b.   Current language: Two-family housing      Res A-1&2 NO;   Res B YES.
 
Change to: Two family housing. Res A-1&2 YES; Res-B YES. 
        and insert new footnote as follows:
New Footnote: Provided that in Residence A districts the street facing exterior
design of the structure is not changed.
Require that all alterations to create these units be made within the existing building envelope, without altering the exterior appearance, except for essential minor alterations at the building rear and the rear half of the building sides. These alterations include, specifically, new entries/means of egress, window wells, dormers, and similar essential but relatively minor changes. Special permitting will be allowed for other exterior changes. Short-term rentals shall be governed by applicable city ordinances. Provide up to 40% of the cost of renovations from the Cambridge Historical Housing Trust for properties in which at least 50% of the occupants of such new units earn no more than 150% of AMI with annual recertification and commensurate deed restriction.  
  Rationale:  Increase available housing in the city while preserving building facades and neighborhood character.
 
4.31c. Existing one-family detached dwelling converted for two families  Res A-1&2 YES. 
Insert new footnote as follows:
 
New Footnote: Provided that in Res. A-1&2  districts the building’s street facing exterior design is not changed and that a maximum of 3 families inhabit the property.
Require that all alterations to create these units be made within the existing building envelope, without altering the exterior appearance, except for essential minor alterations at the building rear and the rear half of the building sides. These alterations include, specifically, new entries/means of egress, window wells, dormers, and similar essential but relatively minor changes. Special permitting will be allowed for other exterior changes. Short-term rentals shall be governed by applicable city ordinances. Provide city funding for renovations in which at least 50% of the occupants of such new units earn no more than 150% of AMI with annual recertification and commensurate deed restriction.  
  Rationale:  Increase available housing in the city while preserving building facades and neighborhood character.
 
4.31h. Current language: Existing dwelling converted for more than two families.   Res A-1&2 NO;   Res B YES
 
Change to: Existing dwelling converted for more than two families. Res A-1&2 YES; Res B YES.
and insert new footnote as follows:
 
New Footnote: Provided the exterior design is not changed and a maximum of 3 families inhabit the property.
Require that all needed alterations to create these units be made within the existing building envelope, without altering the exterior appearance, except for essential minor alterations at the building rear and the rear half of the building sides. These alterations include, specifically, new entries/means of egress, window wells, dormers, and similar essential but relatively minor changes. Special permitting will be allowed for other exterior changes. Short-term rentals shall be governed by applicable city ordinances. Provide up to 40% of the cost of renovations from the Cambridge Historical Housing Trust  for properties in which at least 50% of the occupants of such new units earn no more than 150% of AMI with annual recertification and commensurate deed restriction.  
Rationale:  Increase available housing in the city while preserving building facades and neighborhood character.
 
5.31.3 Residential District Dimensional Regulations:  Min Lot Area for Each D.U [Dwelling Unit]
 
            Current language. Res. A-1: 6,000 sq. ft. insert new footnote as follows:
 
New Footnote :  Reduce Min. Lot Area to 4500 SF if all alterations are within the existing building envelope. Provide up to 40% of the cost of renovations from the Cambridge Historical Housing Trust  for properties in which at least 50% of the occupants of such new units earn no more than 150% of AMI with annual recertification and commensurate deed restriction.
Rationale: Make dwelling units easier to create, add to the available housing in the city, bring Res A-1&2 into conformity with each other.
 
5.31.7  Min. Ratio of Private Op [open space] to Lot Area
 
Current language:    Res. A-1&2:  50%
Change language to: Res. A-1&2:  45%
Rationale: to make additional dwelling units easier to create and add to the available housing in the city.
This would bring Res A-1&2 in closer conformity with the 40% currently specified for Res-B.       
                                     
APPENDEX A:  Amend AHO Currently in City Hearings to Provide Greater Equity and Sustainability
 
Retain current design and review processes with the Planning Board in its advisory and oversight roles, but create a new Design Review Board (similar to those in Boston  and other cities) for use in cases of appeal. This Board would meet on an Ad Hoc basis and would be comprised of 3 members each of the Cambridge Historic Commission, the Planning Board, and the BZA, chaired on a rotating basis by the CHC and BZA delegate. At least 3 members of this committee should be architects or urban designers. Limit the criteria for this appeal to issues of context only (environmental impact and consistency with nearby architecture) and limit the time in which such appeals can be made to 30 days.  
To assure environmental viability, “affordable” housing developments built in current residential zones shall conform with the following:   
affordable Housing using the Overlay must follow the Tree Protection Ordinance preventing removal of larger trees until the Tree Protection Ordinance is revised. in projects with above-ground open space (porches, decks etc.), such areas shall not exceed 15% of total property open space. in residential districts currently zoned additionally for commercial activities, developers shall include active ground-floor uses such as small businesses benefiting the neighborhood with non-opaque windows on the street.   To enhance greater equity city-wide, require that every AHO project include a minimum of 20% home ownership. One example where this dual use works well is 303 third street.  
Enhance the AHO Design Review Criteria with the following: In order to improve procedures and facilitate neighborhood engagement when creating affordable housing projects, the City shall create a means for timely citizen review and evaluation of affordable housing developers and projects (current and past) with respect to design questions, building process, building and site maintenance and other issues, and make the results available to the public. Tie results to future funding sources.  
To ensure complementarity with existing neighborhood settings, require that new affordable housing projects maintain a maximum of 1.5 times the height of adjacent residences up to 4 stories and a maximum FAR of double the current district’s FAR with a maximum of 1.5 FAR. The proposed 2.0 FAR for the AHO is FIVE TIMES larger than the 0.4 FAR that a large number of  A-1, A-2 and B residences currently have. This is a massive scale increase, one that will dramatically transform any neighborhood where proposed projects are built, creating structures (even if limited to 4 or 5 stories) far larger than the smaller one- and two-story houses nearby (see below). A FAR of 2.0 in Cambridge (and most other places) is typically reserved for commercial and office districts or institutional dorm residences. 1.5 is already high and is the maximum recommended FAR for residential districts proposed by carfree cities (carfree.com) who identify 1.5 as  “quite high” and “not unusual”  and distinguishes “4-story buildings with modest…courts.”  In an already dense historic city like Cambridge, double the current FAR or a 1.5 FAR should be the upper limit for residential districts not on a main corridor. A citywide 2.0 FAR impacts city neighborhoods disproportionately, with 02138, 02139, and 02140 residential properties impacted more than others.
 
Priortize denser and taller housing that would exceed current residential zoning to be built only along main corridors, along public transit (bus) routes, and within one-half mile of subway stations. This allows the residents to access nearby amenities such as grocery stores, etc and will encourage pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit uses. Keeping new denser, taller structures only in these designated areas will maintain the feel of neighborhoods.  Affordable housing projects shall be excluded from discussions of site or neighborhood “context” in future building design discussions before city commissions since AHO projects are intended as anomalous in scale.  

APPENDIX B: Adopt Additional Recommendations to Further Increase Affordable Housing
 
Since land acquisition costs constitute a significant barrier to more affordable housing construction, require that the City designate City-owned properties for building or repurposing as low-,  moderate-, and middle-income (“affordable”)  housing; set goals for yearly property designation/acquisition; and report back yearly to Council on the progress, with an average goal of 50 housing units per year and 500 units completed by 2030.
 
Cambridge Institutions with large land holdings now zoned for housing should be encouraged to develop these sites at higher densities to increase the inventory of affordable housing for students, faculty and staff. (MIT has housing at FAR 3.0 now. Much of their land is below that number and MIT can produce over 2500 housing units equal to their off campus students). Encourage commercial companies and corporations (Google, Novartis, Microsoft, Biotechs etc.) to fund affordable housing. The city shall initiate a program to recruit local Institutions and to invest in an affordable housing mortgage fund to be administered by the Housing Trust; contributing institutions shall have representation on the Affordable Housing Trust.  
Require all new housing developments of 20 units or more contribute to a public open space fund to assure adequate open space for the city's citizens.  Involve neighborhood association and report back to City Council each year with specific projects, time lines, impact analysis, and programming.  

To further increase affordability, establish financial resources for qualified households (elderly, disabled, lower-income) to help them rent private rental units, similar to section-8 vouchers but city-funded. Elligibility could include public service employees, low-salaried occupations such as artists, social workers, teachers, clergy, child-care workers, and similar occupations.  
Provide city-funded, lower-than-commercial-rate second mortgages to enable a larger percentage of stable home-ownership in this city. These down-payment-assistance mortgages would be structured as financially self-sustaining (after the initial setup costs) with careful credit checks and appropriate interest rates charged, allowing occasional foreclosure costs. Unlike rents, fixed-rate 1st and 2nd mortgage payments never increase.  
Make accessible without fee for first time home buyers seeking to own a home in Cambridge any required application materials for federally ensured mortgages and down payments assistance.  

Allow Community Land Trusts set up for affordable housing to have the same City benefits as affordable housing developers are allowed. Rationale: such land trusts furnish the same kinds of affordable housing benefits.  
Remove hotels from current city classification as residential uses and reclassify them under commercial uses. Commercial use is how they are classified in most cities. Too often property owners with buildings that hold tenants, terminate these leases and reuse  them as hotels with the. added “pump ups” that the city allows to residential properties, even though they no longer serve residential purposes.  

Revise governing rules of Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust membeship to 1) exclude individuals who do business with the City of Cambridge,  2) include at least one representative from each of the major Cambridge neighborhoods, and 3) limit members’ terms of service to a maximum of three three-year terms.